Can you give me a solid proof

[syo]

Can you give me a solid proof that God does not exist?
Your proof must be possible to repeat multiple times, and evidence for God non existence must be so solid that it cant be disproven by believers in God.

I do not ask for woowoo answer, only serious evidence of non existence will be accepted as proof.

And you must be able to show your proof in more than one way.

They can't do it.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

This thread is about proving God does not exist.

I believe that proof will not come here.

While you were at it, you ought to have included a challenge to prove that Bigfoot, Chupacabra, Invisible Pink Unicorns and witches that can turn men into pigs don't exist. It's all going to the same "proof" anyway.

As a consequence, by the way, I would expect anyone who accepts your thread as proof that God does exist would likewise have to admit that my list does, too.

 

[Watchmen]

They can't do it.

They don’t need to.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I've made threads about them before. I believe they are refuted. I'm just answering the OP, if any arguments there are to disprove God, it would be one of those three. They are formidable ones I know.

Unfortunately you used very poor reasoning, most of it was very circular. Referring to your own failed posts is not a wise strategy

 

[stevecanuck]

Can you give me a solid proof that God does not exist?
Your proof must be possible to repeat multiple times, and evidence for God non existence must be so solid that it cant be disproven by believers in God.

I do not ask for woowoo answer, only serious evidence of non existence will be accepted as proof.

And you must be able to show your proof in more than one way.

I'm not going to mine through 6 pages of what I expect to be the bleedin' obvious, but I'm sure many have told you that asking someone to prove a negative is disingenuous nonsense.

Have you got solid, repeatable proof that the Great Horphulat does not exist (I believe him to be the god of quadricorns in case you don't know)?

 

[Altfish]

I trust that this is the standard you apply consistently, and that you don't have a special double standard for wild supernatural claims:

"You can only say that T-Rexes are presumed extinct. You can't say that they are extinct for sure."

"I'll never stop looking for my aunt's killers. Yes, she was in hospice with terminal cancer when she died, and the doctors found nothing inconsistent with her dying of cancer, but I can't absolutely rule out the possibility that she was murdered."

"Why did you put eggs on the shopping list? You can't be certain that we're out!"

I do BUT I also do not believe Big Foot, Loch Ness Monster etc exist. The overwhelming lack of evidence brings me to decision on what I believe to be true.

 

[Altfish]

I can't disprove the Loch Ness Monster in that way (and I can't disprove all gods) as there are no obviously (or derived) contradictions in the assertions about it.
I can prove, by that method, that there is no pink, invisible dragon in your garage.

OK, prove it then. Because I'm not sure how you'd do that. I still say there is one in my garage

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I do BUT I also do not believe Big Foot, Loch Ness Monster etc exist. The overwhelming lack of evidence brings me to decision on what I believe to be true.

Okay - so you are familiar with the idea of practical certainty.

 

[Pudding]

Can you give me a solid proof that God does not exist?
Your proof must be possible to repeat multiple times, and evidence for God non existence must be so solid that it cant be disproven by believers in God.

I do not ask for woowoo answer, only serious evidence of non existence will be accepted as proof.

And you must be able to show your proof in more than one way.

I can't give you solid proof that Holy Unicorn does not exist.
I can't give you solid proof that God does not exist.
I can't give you solid proof that Fairy King does not exist.
I can't give you solid proof that Vampire does not exist.
I can't give you solid proof that Banana God does not exist.
I can't give you solid proof that Gorilla God does not exist.
I can't give you solid proof that Crocodile God does not exist.
I can't give you solid proof that Evil God does not exist.
I can't give you solid proof that Immoral God does not exist.
I can't give you solid proof that Holy Unicorn is not God.
I can't give you solid proof that Holy Unicorn is not the creator of this universe.
I can't give you solid proof that Holy Unicorn is not humanity's grandma.

 

[Fool]

Can you give me a solid proof that God does not exist?
Your proof must be possible to repeat multiple times, and evidence for God non existence must be so solid that it cant be disproven by believers in God.

I do not ask for woowoo answer, only serious evidence of non existence will be accepted as proof.

And you must be able to show your proof in more than one way.

you can't really prove absolutely anything apart from self. even western science doesn't promote anything as absolute. so then the only absolute is that there is no absolute.

you honestly can't prove another person loves you. you could test them but then even a psychopath is very, very good about faking it. there have been cases where a psychopath has been in a relationship for decades and then suddenly the game is over.


the only thing one can be sure of, is what they determine is divine? shouldn't it be something that is basically positive? helpful? giving one purpose? being nurturing?


love is the hidden manna. we thrive on it. we're like conduits for it. it's everywhere.

 

[syo]

They don’t need to.

Who cares, since they can't do it anyway.

 

[Heyo]

OK, prove it then. Because I'm not sure how you'd do that. I still say there is one in my garage

Having colour (in this case pink) is defined as giving of light (by reflection or through autonomous emission) in the visible spectrum. Being invisible is defined as not radiating or reflecting or bending or otherwise distorting light in the visible spectrum.
That is a contradiction. A and not A. Logically it can not exist.
The same way I can disprove every god that has contradictory properties in its description list.

 

[Altfish]

Having colour (in this case pink) is defined as giving of light (by reflection or through autonomous emission) in the visible spectrum. Being invisible is defined as not radiating or reflecting or bending or otherwise distorting light in the visible spectrum.
That is a contradiction. A and not A. Logically it can not exist.
The same way I can disprove every god that has contradictory properties in its description list.

Very good.

Thus you have almost disproved invisibility because most things have colour?

 

[muhammad_isa]

The same way I can disprove every god that has contradictory properties in its description list.

No you can't.
G-d is not a physical phenomena.

You might say that G-d cannot be both "all-loving" and "strict in punishment", so doesn't exist.
I beg to differ.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Having colour (in this case pink) is defined as giving of light (by reflection or through autonomous emission) in the visible spectrum. Being invisible is defined as not radiating or reflecting or bending or otherwise distorting light in the visible spectrum.
That is a contradiction. A and not A. Logically it can not exist.
The same way I can disprove every god that has contradictory properties in its description list.

Well that is hardly fair. By that logic the God of the Bible, the Muslim's Allah, and just about every other God do not exist either

 

[Subduction Zone]

No you can't.
G-d is not a physical phenomena.

You might say that G-d cannot be both "all-loving" and "strict in punishment", so doesn't exist.
I beg to differ.

He does not have to use physical properties. And yes, a God that is just and puts people in hell is also self refuting. If you give us your attributes for Allah I am willing to bet that he is self refuting as well.

 

[Trailblazer]

You have the burden of proof backwards.

Yeah, that is backwards, and besides nobody can prove a universal negative.
Good to see you again. You keep popping in and out.

 

[Trailblazer]

This thread is about proving God does not exist.

With all due respect, that can never be proven, nor can God exists ever be proven.
There is evidence that God exists, but there is no proof. If there was proof God exists would be a fact, not a belief.
But this looks like a fun thread, although I will never catch up since I just saw it.

 

[Trailblazer]

You can not prove God does not exist, so you are rendered moot...

No, he cannot prove that, but that does not mean that God exists.
We believe that but beliefs are not proof.
IF God wanted to be proven to exist, THEN God would have provided proof.
God provided evidence but evidence is not proof.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Yeah, that is backwards, and besides nobody can prove a universal negative.
Good to see you again. You keep popping in and out.

Hmm, you might be right. I can find negatives on this site but there is no guarantee that any of them came from Universal:

film negative from universal studios - Google Search